Futurist Ray Kurzweil claims that within just four years, medical advances will let humans achieve “longevity escape velocity”—meaning each year, science will add more than a year to our life expectancy. In a recent interview, Kurzweil points to rapid progress in fields like mRNA vaccines and simulated biology as evidence that this milestone is close.
The article explores what longevity escape velocity really means: it’s not immortality, but a point where, for those with access to cutting-edge medicine, life expectancy could keep increasing faster than we age. Of course, the piece also notes the many caveats—like the difference between average life expectancy and actual lifespan, and the persistent risks from disease and accidents.
Is this prediction realistic, or just another case of tech optimism? What breakthroughs (or obstacles) do you see on the path to radically extended lifespans?
pfdietz•8mo ago
> just another case of tech optimism
karlperera•8mo ago
Personally I see great advances ahead but do wonder if extending lifespans will result in better quality of life for longer otherwise what's the point?
pfdietz•8mo ago
I want you to consider the scale of the problem.
In particular: cells accumulate genetic damage over time. Each cell receives a different set of mutations. So it's not just the problem of correcting an inborn genetic error across all cells, it's the problem of specific patches for every cell in the body.
If you can't do this, I don't care what other advances are made, the cells (including neurons which aren't replaced) will eventually stop working.
karlperera•8mo ago
that's a sensible comment worth considering. The problem of aging is very complex of course!
ggm•8mo ago
He's a brilliant self publicist, but less brilliant at biology.
karlperera•8mo ago
The article explores what longevity escape velocity really means: it’s not immortality, but a point where, for those with access to cutting-edge medicine, life expectancy could keep increasing faster than we age. Of course, the piece also notes the many caveats—like the difference between average life expectancy and actual lifespan, and the persistent risks from disease and accidents.
Is this prediction realistic, or just another case of tech optimism? What breakthroughs (or obstacles) do you see on the path to radically extended lifespans?
pfdietz•8mo ago
karlperera•8mo ago
pfdietz•8mo ago
In particular: cells accumulate genetic damage over time. Each cell receives a different set of mutations. So it's not just the problem of correcting an inborn genetic error across all cells, it's the problem of specific patches for every cell in the body.
If you can't do this, I don't care what other advances are made, the cells (including neurons which aren't replaced) will eventually stop working.
karlperera•8mo ago